Too Good not to share!

The “climate crisis” is a lie, a hoax, a fraud, an affront to science and logic, a travesty, an economic and social sinkhole, a fake phoney baloney preposterous fabrication, a boondoggle, a massive waste of time and money, a pain in the arse, and it’s really silly too.

Dr Patrick Moore co-founder and former leader of Greenpeace.

This page is a permanent link to the reply below and its nested replies. See all post replies »

ElwoodBlues · M

@dakotaviper @hippyjoe1955
The global warming / climate change we're seeing in the last 100 or so years is MUCH different from anything measured in the glacial & sea sediment records covering the last 700,000 years. CO2 is rising 100x faster, and temps 10x faster.

"How is Today’s Warming Different from the Past?" https://earthobservatory.nasa.gov/features/GlobalWarming/page3.php "As the Earth moved out of ice ages over the past million years, the global temperature rose a total of 4 to 7 degrees Celsius over about 5,000 years. In the past century alone, the temperature has climbed 0.7 degrees Celsius, roughly ten times faster than the average rate of ice-age-recovery warming."

How is today's CO2 increase different? https://www.climate.gov/news-features/understanding-climate/climate-change-atmospheric-carbon-dioxide "The annual rate of increase in atmospheric carbon dioxide over the past 60 years is about 100 times faster than previous natural increases, such as those that occurred at the end of the last ice age 11,000-17,000 years ago."

Fact is, anthropogenic global warming is accepted by a YUGE segment of the scientific community. Would you accept the consensus opinion of the American Physical Society AND the American Chemical Society? How about the American Association for the Advancement of Science, and at least 15 other national organizations of publishing scientists? See https://climate.nasa.gov/scientific-consensus/

UPDATE

@hippyjoe1955 says:

CO2 is not a driver of climate.

Yes, it is, thru the well known greenhouse effect.
https://climate.mit.edu/ask-mit/how-do-greenhouse-gases-trap-heat-atmosphere
https://www.acs.org/content/acs/en/climatescience/climatesciencenarratives/what-is-the-greenhouse-effect.html

If it were life would have been eliminated when the CO2 levels were at 6000 PPM during the cretaceous period.

FALSE. GIANT straw man fallacy.
High CO2 levels will raise avg temperatures, causing polar ice to melt, raising sea levels and flooding $100 trillion worth of seaside land & structures.

Reducing CO2 is about preventing that disaster, as I posted elsewhere here.

According to Brittannica

Surface water temperatures were about 30 °C (86 °F) at the Equator year-round, but at the poles they were 14 °C (57 °F) in winter and 17 °C (63 °F) in summer.

How do we know? From oxygen isotopes in Cretaceous fossils.

Sea levels, according to Brittannica:

In general, world oceans were about 100 to 200 metres (330 to 660 feet) higher in the Early Cretaceous and roughly 200 to 250 metres (660 to 820 feet) higher in the Late Cretaceous than at present.

How do we know? Because sedimentary rocks in the interiors of continents contain the fossilized remains of marine organisms such as clams, oysters, and corals, demonstrating that they were deposited below the sea. The extent of all this sub-sea sediment is far too large to be explained by ordinary rising & subsidence of land masses.

hippyjoe1955 · 70-79, M

@ElwoodBlues Son when are you going to finally get it that you can not base the measure of climate change on 100 years. You can't base it on a thousand years either. The fact is that the climate changes. Sometimes very quickly (ask the mammoths in Siberia) and sometimes quite slowly. But what we do know is that the change is constant. We can't control it. We don't have a magic thermostat that we can crank one way or the other. The climate does what it does and we just go along for the ride. Your foolish idea that we have some sort of input into is is laughable on its face.

dakotaviper · 56-60, M

@ElwoodBlues But the problem is that Everyone is thinking that the USA and Canada are the only ones causing this. Russia, China, India, Europe, and Southeast Asia are not doing anything to stop it either. Meaning that we're the ones paying for it and it's not fair.

hippyjoe1955 · 70-79, M

@dakotaviper It is such an idiotic theory to begin with. Couple it with the fact that the 'change' can not be measured or quantified or even properly ascribed.... Such is the foolishness of the modern 'science guy'. As someone explained to me long ago the best way to fool a person is give him a false education. He will think he knows science and will trust the 'scientists' rather than use his own head to figure things out. Like my inlaws One is a science teacher in high school. The other does cutting edge research into alternative energy. The high school teacher thinks that the climate is changing and civilization as we know it is about to end. The research expert laughs his head off at the teacher. The teacher has no idea what science actually is but because it is in one of his text books .....

ElwoodBlues · M

@dakotaviper CO2 emissions worldwide are about 4.5 tons per capita per year. We need to get that down to around 2.5. And, in many countries, poor people are not emitting anywhere near their 2.5 tons, so folks in wealthy nations could theoretically buy carbon credits from those not emitting much. India emits 1.91 tons per capita per year for example.

However, some countries are way over "budget." China: 7.38, Russia: 11.44, USA: 15.1, Canada 18.58. Overall, rich countries have to reduce more than poor countries.
Source: https://www.worldometers.info/co2-emissions/co2-emissions-per-capita/

Speaking for myself, we got our solar panels running earlier this year, and during long sunny days we're generating 20-22 KWh per day, much more than we use.

hippyjoe1955 · 70-79, M

@ElwoodBlues CO2 is not a driver of climate. If it were life would have been eliminated when the CO2 levels were at 6000 PPM during the cretaceous period. What happened? Did the temperature go up and just keep going up turning Earth into Venus? Nope. The temperature went down. The CO2 levels began to fall as life converted CO2 into limestone and coal. I bet you don't even know that life thrives in a CO2 rich environment. Somewhere about 1200 PPM is optimal for both plants and animals. Ask any greenhouse operator.

ElwoodBlues · M

@hippyjoe1955

CO2 is not a driver of climate.

If it were life would have been eliminated when the CO2 levels were at 6000 PPM during the cretaceous period.

Surface water temperatures were about 30 °C (86 °F) at the Equator year-round, but at the poles they were 14 °C (57 °F) in winter and 17 °C (63 °F) in summer.

How do we know? From oxygen isotopes in Cretaceous fossils.

This comment is hidden. Show Comment